Re: Geo-blocking, DRM, and the 'Australia Tax'

On 07/29/2013 03:26 PM, John Foliot wrote:
> I don't see *any* example of DRM in this article, but rather of
> "geo-blocking" by IP range, a common and long-standing practice that has
> nothing to do with media encryption.

It's because the article gives a rather confusing summary of the
government report.  It begins with a few quotes on "geo-blocking"
which indeed refers to IP address blocking. After that:
<quote>
The report advised that the Australian government amend the Copyright
Act's anti-circumvention provisions to "clarify and secure consumers'
rights to circumvent technological protection measures that control
geographic market segmentation".
</quote>

Here "technological protection measures" (TPM) is a term used in the
government report that includes DRM, but not geo-blocking by IP.

Quoting the original government report, Chapter 4.46:
"The Committee notes the distinction between technological protection
measures (TPMs) and geoblocking technologies."

and 4.48:
"TPMs (also referred to as effective technological measures, or ETMs) and
digital rights management systems (DRM) are measures designed to prevent
unauthorised access to or copying of copyright protected content."

then 4.49 to 4.54 goes on to list the many ways TPMs are harmful to
users and a competitive marketplace... a few quotes:

"TPMs now appear to impose significant costs on legitimate but
technically unsophisticated users. They prevent users from
making backups of their software as permitted by the copyright
act. They prevent blind people from using software to read books
aloud. They cause untold headaches for consumers who purchase
content only to find that the copy protection is faulty, rendering
their purchase useless. If and when Australia introduces new
copyright exceptions to allow commonplace activities like making
backups of digital copies of films, books, games and music; and
making copies of each of these for viewing on portable devices or
over cloud services, these activities will also be hampered by
TPMs. They do not, however, prevent technically sophisticated
individuals from breaking the locks and engaging in large-scale
infringement."

"TPMs have been used for anti-competitive purposes in attempts
to control secondary markets for remote controls, printer
cartridges, data storage, and wireless telephone services. There
have also been a number of cases in which there have been
difficulties engaging in security testing and reverse engineering
because of the use of TPMs."

"TPMs can limit or prevent a number of legitimate uses of content
by libraries, schools and universities.
... circumstances in which teachers are prevented from using
content because of TPMs, even where the intended use of that
content is non-infringing under copyright law. Where TPMs are
attached, educators cannot:
  - Create subtitled versions of films for hearing impaired students
  - Use devices other than a DVD player (like iPads, laptops,
content management systems) to play protected DVDs in the
course of classroom instruction
  - Compile film clips and other snippets of content protected by
TPMs to aid student analysis or classroom discussion."

"Even where copyright law recognises a specific situation in which
TPMs can be circumvented or removed, in practice this may be
difficult to achieve... Digital locks attached to content can restrict
a user's ability to print, copy or email portions of the text as
permitted under copyright law"


They conclude in 4.55:

"This evidence indicates that TPMs can restrict competition in copyright
markets by preventing consumers from accessing and using legally
acquired content in legitimate ways. The Committee is also aware that
TPMs have been used in some circumstances to enforce geographic
market segmentation (that is, as a form of geoblocking)."

There you have it -- TPMs (DRM) have been used to "enforce geographic
market segmentation", as Duncan claimed.

After reading chapter 4 of the original report it is clear that TPMs
(DRM) is a factor in enabling the price discrimination (and many other
abuses of users' rights) in Australia.

It's an interesting read and highly relevant to the matters discussed
on this list:

Chapter 4. "Copyright, circumvention, competition, and remedies":
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=ic/itpricing/report/chapter4.pdf

Received on Tuesday, 30 July 2013 03:34:28 UTC